Kochi: The Kerala High Court has struck down the state government’s decision to appoint an inquiry commission to examine the rights of nearly 600 families facing eviction after a property in Munambam was declared waqf land, reported the Bar and Bench.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while allowing the petition filed by Kerala Waqf Samrakshana Vedhi, ruled that the inquiry commission had no authority to interfere in a matter already settled by a judicial body. The court emphasized that the commission lacked adjudicatory powers and that its report would not be binding on the government.
“The commission of inquiry has no power of adjudication on any question of title and is neither a judicial nor a quasi-judicial body. Its terms of reference do not enable it to decide whether the property is waqf or not,” the court noted.
The dispute involves land in Munambam that originally measured 404.76 acres but has now reduced to 135.11 acres due to sea erosion. The land was gifted to Farook College in 1950 by Siddique Sait, but it was already home to many residents, leading to legal battles. The college later sold portions of the land without mentioning its waqf status. In 2019, the Kerala Waqf Board formally registered the land as waqf property, voiding these sales and triggering opposition from residents facing eviction.
An appeal challenging this classification is pending before the Waqf Tribunal in Kozhikode. Meanwhile, the Kerala government appointed an inquiry commission in November 2024, led by former High Court judge Justice CN Ramachandran Nair, to recommend solutions amid protests from affected families.
The state, represented by Advocate General Gopalakrishna Kurup, defended the commission as a fact-finding body. However, the petitioners, represented by advocates TU Ziyad and PK Ibrahim, argued that it was an attempt to protect encroachers.
Justice Thomas highlighted that only the Waqf Tribunal had the authority to settle the dispute. “The commission cannot determine if it’s a gift deed or waqf deed. That is for the tribunal to decide,” he observed.
The court also raised concerns about the legal sustainability of the commission, stating that no judicial commission had ever been set up to determine private rights in such cases. Consequently, the state’s decision to constitute the inquiry commission was quashed.
